GURPS-Share your thoughts

[sfgiants]

Wow, thanks for all the opinions/input. I am still deciding. The game seems good, but I am having trouble getting over the idea that each second is detailed. Seems like un-needed complexity I guess. Am I wrong here?

 

[Conaill]

Wow, thanks for all the opinions/input. I am still deciding. The game seems good, but I am having trouble getting over the idea that each second is detailed. Seems like un-needed complexity I guess. Am I wrong here?

Doesn't bother me.

It *does* bother me in DnD that, even with 6-second rounds, people still say "that one attack really represents a set of feints and half-jabs spread over a 6 second period, with perhaps only one jab in there with an actual chance of connecting". That's right up there with "hitpoints in DnD are not really hits"...

You know how *long* 6 seconds is in combat?

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

Yes there have been a few clunkers over the years (Fantasy II: The Madlands being the worst of the lot) but D&D has had similar mess ups.

You know, Fantasy II has a certain strange appeal. I mean, a weird, alien, and deadly fantasy landscape reshaped by the whims of cthonic deities modelled after Winnie the Pooh and friends can't help but be fascinating.

But I can't imagine actually playing such a campaign. Still, the monsters were way cool, and perhaps I will steal them at some point...

 

[Maximara]

Amen to that, brother. That's why AD&D 1e and 2e are true MEN'S games. ONE MINUTE ROUNDS, baby. None of these 1 second/6 seconds nonsense.

When Man to Man came out (the combat system that evolved into GURPS) we made jokes about the AD&D1 combat round. Iiiiiittttts iiiiiinnnnn ssssslloooowww mooootttttiooooonnnnn.

 

[Numion]

You know how *long* 6 seconds is in combat?

In D&D fights usually last 3-8 rounds in my experience. In real life fights can easily last much longer than that. If D&D used one second rounds the fights would last even less time.

 

[buzz]

The real point is that D&D's rounds and hit points work fine in play. They only appear problematic when dissected on gaming fora.

 

[Conaill]

The real point is that D&D's rounds and hit points work fine in play. They only appear problematic when dissected on gaming fora.

Oh, I never claimed they were "problematic". As a game mechanic it works fine. Just like I'm not going to complain that pawns in chess can only move one square at a time. I mean, if that pawn really put in an effort - maybe it's an elite pawn, veteran of many campaigns - maybe it should be able to move two squares every one in a while, right? Sure, you'll have one very tired pawn, but...

Anyway yes, as a game mechanic, D&D works fine. So does GURPS's combat system. It's just that GURPS to me feels a lot more realistic, just like D&D feels more realistic than a game of chess. That doesn't mean it doesn't work...

 

[robertsconley]

GURPS combat can run really well if the GM knows how to work the system. But it works under a different set of assumptions, and this is something that can catch new GURPS GMs off guard.

As a GM of GURPS for over 10 years the big different in combat flavor is what my group calls the "tin can" syndrome. Take a high skill opponent with a shield and plate armor magicked up to the hilt and you get a situtation where you keep making your hit rolls but the opponent keeps making the defense rolls. It starts to boil down to who makes a critical first.

I am pointing out not to be critical of GURP but reinforce that even when using the basic combat you wind up with a very different feel then D20. The two things that attracted my players initially was the point based system of making characters, and the fact you get a defense roll in combat.

As for me the biggest difficulty as a GM was learning all the modifiers and when to apply them. D20 was no more difficult than GURPS in my opinion when it came out if you wanted to use all the options.

One thing I will say that I was impressived how much GMing D20 felt like GM ing Gurps. Because of skills and feats I felt more comfortable with my initital D20 session than I did when I did an occasional AD&D session (switching from GURPS) in the mid 90's.

I observed that people who were used DMing AD&D tended to run their initial games like AD&D where the class pretty much was determining what the character could do. While DMs used to GURPS and other skilled bases system were running looking to see what skill players had as opposed to what class they were.

 

[Shadoglare]

As a GM of GURPS for over 10 years the big different in combat flavor is what my group calls the "tin can" syndrome. Take a high skill opponent with a shield and plate armor magicked up to the hilt and you get a situtation where you keep making your hit rolls but the opponent keeps making the defense rolls. It starts to boil down to who makes a critical first.

Which is exactly why in the new campaign I'm working on right now, I'm being sure to emphasise to the players that as this is not going to be a military or merc campaign, they are not going to be annoyingly well-armed like this. They've been informed they will be allowed to carry a side-arm such as a pistol, and *maybe* some inconspicuous light armor - battles will either be in that light gunplay or in hand-to-hand brawling, or a mix (although I'm sure there will be the occassional "splatter the bad guy across the wall" exception).
I'm sure this will take some adjustment, as the players are all mostly D&D players who are used to the "I need a better toy" mentality and are used to constantly getting weapon & armor upgrades.
That mentality works fine in D&D because no matter how strong you & your opponents' stuff is, if you hit, you hit, and that's all there is to it. Not so with GURPS - which actually allows your target to not just stand there like a doofus and take the hit. (D&D does have a "dodge" but all it is, is an extra feat that adds +1 to your AC against the foe you are currently engaged with). Thus, if you have thick armor and good dodging skills, and so does your opponent, I can definately see battles taking a looooooooooooooong time.
But again that's probably why even in the GURPS rulebooks it states that their rules are designed around battle being a last resort exception, not a rule - they didn't intend them to be for hack-n-slash campaigns where you're killing off a group of baddies every time you turn a corner.

 

[Twowolves]

Oh, I never claimed they were "problematic". As a game mechanic it works fine. Just like I'm not going to complain that pawns in chess can only move one square at a time. I mean, if that pawn really put in an effort - maybe it's an elite pawn, veteran of many campaigns - maybe it should be able to move two squares every one in a while, right? Sure, you'll have one very tired pawn, but...

You mean, like when the pawn makes it's opening move?

I'd much rather play in a game with 6 second rounds, with two combatants mixing it up, each having only one (or more, for skilled fighters) real chance at a telling blow, versus playing a game where half of my actions in combat is "cocking" my axe.